Define "Marriage"

[free spirit]

Do you have even one post in this thread that is NOT a huge steaming pile of bull ****?
I don't see one...
Perhaps I missed one of your posts in this here thread?

No you haven't missed any post to the likes of you, I always steam piles of bull****?
As I said, it will go right over your head.
It is not your fault.

 

[Kerr]

No you haven't missed any post to the likes of you, I always steam piles of bull****?
As I said, it will go right over your head.
It is not your fault.

That is a very arrogant attitude. But lets face it, nothing is static. If marriage had the definition you claim, then marriage need to change.

 

[Dezzie]

I believe it is dependent upon love, commitment, and ceremony. The other two options represent human authority.

I completely agree with this statement. To me, marriage is all about love, friendship, and commitment. I believe the ceremony is only a memorable way of conducting the marriage. The legal documents are defintiely only a representation of human authority. It gives humans a sense of control over anothers life. Especially with same sex marriage.

 

[McBell]

No you haven't missed any post to the likes of you, I always steam piles of bull****?

Nice try at the strawman.
Sorry, it did not work.

As I said, it will go right over your head.

You go with whatever it is that helps you sleep at night.
I mean, you have already proven that truth and facts take a back seat to what you want to believe.

It is not your fault.

I know.

 

[ragordon168]

Well may as well tell you for the good that it will do, I am sure it will go right past over your head.

Are you ready.... Marriage is the mixing of the genes of a man with the genes of a woman all the other paraphernalia is for the protection of the woman and the new born.

Marriage = mixing ..............simple no?

Depart from that one core principle and we are in trouble

that is SEX not marriage. mixing of genes = reproduction = sex. sex does not require a ring or a piece of paper.

marriage is a way of showing your love for each other but is not essential. I know of plenty of people that never got married but are happier than people who rushed into it.

marriage is a commitment to your love nothing else. regardless of straight/gay marriage its the same thing

 

[McBell]

that is SEX not marriage. mixing of genes = reproduction = sex. sex does not require a ring or a piece of paper.

marriage is a way of showing your love for each other but is not essential. I know of plenty of people that never got married but are happier than people who rushed into it.

marriage is a commitment to your love nothing else. regardless of straight/gay marriage its the same thing

well, he feels he needs to justify his gods order of no premarital sex.
He just does a rather poor job at it.

 

[free spirit]

that is SEX not marriage. mixing of genes = reproduction = sex. sex does not require a ring or a piece of paper.

The question was "define Marriage without referring to gender or religion"
For all intention and purposes marriage = mixing of the genes, all the rest of the paraphernalia is for the protection of the woman and the new borne, I am not surprise that you all find that definition unsatisfactory, because that definition is too simple, too crude, too primitive, it does not fit your agenda.

example, oil does not marry (or mix) well with water, certain foods do not marry (or mix) well: in other words they do not create a third and more exiting flavour.
Realistically marriage is also the extension of the mixing of the bride and groom families. marriage is to became related or have the same DNA.
It cannot be changed, but if we work all together now we can defile this honorable institution. People destroy everything that is pristine on the planet there is nothing sacred.

marriage is a way of showing your love for each other but is not essential. I know of plenty of people that never got married but are happier than people who rushed into it.

No marriage does not show love for each other I know people that are married and hate each other, again marriage shows that the two for all intention and purpose's have became one, like a scramble egg; and divorce separates them as individuals again.

marriage is a commitment to your love nothing else. regardless of straight/gay marriage its the same thing

Marriage (for the wanting of a better word) between gay people is nothing more than the hijacking of the marriage paraphernalia for the protection of their material and emotional investment . Get real!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

[Autodidact]

I always steam piles of bull****?

Yes, we noticed that.

 

[Kilgore Trout]

I completely agree with this statement. To me, marriage is all about love, friendship, and commitment. I believe the ceremony is only a memorable way of conducting the marriage. The legal documents are defintiely only a representation of human authority. It gives humans a sense of control over anothers life. Especially with same sex marriage.

However, you can have love, friendship, and commitment without marriage. The legal documents are the one aspect that are necessary for marriage.

 

[ragordon168]

The question was "define Marriage without referring to gender or religion"
For all intention and purposes marriage = mixing of the genes, all the rest of the paraphernalia is for the protection of the woman and the new borne, I am not surprise that you all find that definition unsatisfactory, because that definition is too simple, too crude, too primitive, it does not fit your agenda.

that underlined bit is waaaaaay off. marriage has absolutely nothing to do with the mixing of genes. as i said that is sex not marriage. if you needed to be married to have kids then i wouldnt exist as my mother has never been married.

the red bit, now that is something i have no real idea how to answer but ill give it ago. how in the name of the holy father, son and spirit does a gold ring with a really expensive gem in it protect a baby?

and BTW i never mentioned religion, you did.

example, oil does not marry (or mix) well with water, certain foods do not marry (or mix) well: in other words they do not create a third and more exiting flavour.
Realistically marriage is also the extension of the mixing of the bride and groom families. marriage is to became related or have the same DNA.
It cannot be changed, but if we work all together now we can defile this honorable institution. People destroy everything that is pristine on the planet there is nothing sacred.

marriage is not a chemical reaction it is a union of families. to become related through law (important defination as you can marry an in law) only the child will share DNA from the 2 families but again, doesn't require a marriage just sex.

No marriage does not show love for each other I know people that are married and hate each other, again marriage shows that the two for all intention and purpose's have became one, like a scramble egg; and divorce separates them as individuals again.

people get married because they think they are soul mates but quite often they have rushed into it and end up getting divorced. true marriage is a union of lovers nothing more, nothing less

Marriage (for the wanting of a better word) between gay people is nothing more than the hijacking of the marriage paraphernalia for the protection of their material and emotional investment . Get real!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

which is different from straight marriage nowadays how? years ago marriage was about kids. now that has shifted to possesions/wealth. marriage is about love but money still comes into it - straight or gay

again i will say "true marriage is a union of lovers nothing more, nothing less" notice i never mention sexuallity.


homophobia. how fun to see it fall on its face

 

[free spirit]

that underlined bit is waaaaaay off. marriage has absolutely nothing to do with the mixing of genes. as i said that is sex not marriage. if you needed to be married to have kids then i wouldnt exist as my mother has never been married.

you just do not get it do you; you can have a lot of sex and never mix the genes the mixing of genes is a result of sex but in itself it is not sex. only the mixing of genes consist in the marriage or indissoluble union of two entity into one new life.
In a nutshell that is what marriage is, full stop. You can dress it up with a ring on the finger, or on the nose, a crown, a veil, a white dress, a cake, do I need to say more, those things do not make marriage a marriage, they are only a prelude of joy an expectation to what hope to happen; and that is the mixing of the two genes.

the italic bit, now that is something i have no real idea how to answer but ill give it ago. how in the name of the holy father, son and spirit does a gold ring with a really expensive gem in it protect a baby?

The family is the center of society, its weakest members the woman and the new borne have to be protected, there is why the law evolved for that purpose.



The rest of your argument is not very smart it is waoooooy of the argument on hand.
So can you do any better to define indissoluble marriage if you take out the mixing of the genes.

try to understand, We call it marriage but there is more to marriage then meets the eye religion does not make a marriage, the law does not make a marriage, a big wedding does not make a marriage, love does not make a marriage, even gender does not make a marriage; because all those things a temporal and can be dissolved, only the mixing of the two genes can marry and form a new indissoluble life, or an indissoluble marriage which will truly last a life time.

 

[ragordon168]

you just do not get it do you; you can have a lot of sex and never mix the genes the mixing of genes is a result of sex but in itself it is not sex. Only the mixing of genes consist in the marriage or indissoluble union of two entity into one new life.
in a nutshell that is what marriage is, full stop. You can dress it up with a ring on the finger, or on the nose, a crown, a veil, a white dress, a cake, do i need to say more, those things do not make marriage a marriage, they are only a prelude of joy an expectation to what hope to happen; and that is the mixing of the two genes.

1. A gene is the basic unit of heredity in a living organism. All living things depend on genes. Genes hold the information to build and maintain their cells and pass genetic traits to offspring. In general terms, a gene is a segment of nucleic acid that, taken as a whole, specifies a trait. ...

(Gene - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia)

where in that does it mention marriage? Pass on traits to offspring, thats it. You dont see animals marrying but they still reproduce.

the family is the center of society, its weakest members the woman and the new borne have to be protected, there is why the law evolved for that purpose.

i wouldnt say that to a feminist. Women do not need 'protecting', they can go off on their own with their child and do just fine without a man to hold their hand.

The law evolved more because of sexism in western society, women were not as strong as men and couldnt cope without a 'master'.

the rest of your argument is not very smart it is waoooooy of the argument on hand.
so can you do any better to define indissoluble marriage if you take out the mixing of the genes.

try to understand, we call it marriage but there is more to marriage then meets the eye religion does not make a marriage, the law does not make a marriage, a big wedding does not make a marriage, love does not make a marriage, even gender does not make a marriage; because all those things a temporal and can be dissolved, only the mixing of the two genes can marry and form a new indissoluble life, or an indissoluble marriage which will truly last a life time.

indissoluble marriage is unavoidable, there will always be those who rush into it and end up ending it. but there are those who marry their soul mate and are happy.

my great-grandparents got to their diamond anniversary but refused a meeting with the queen as they had to rush it as she was already pregnant. they lasted until they died so they obviously were soulmates. that is an indissoluble marriage to me.

marriage has changed from a business deal between the father and groom, the bride price (i.e for a tribe in papua new guinea the going price for a woman is 3 fat pigs with more if she has a nice body) to a decleration of love

marriage is a soley human concept, it is based on emotion and not the need to procreate. religion made marriage as a way of cashing in on love - you cant have sex until you marry, and btw that'll be $200.

 

[Autodidact]

you just do not get it do you; you can have a lot of sex and never mix the genes the mixing of genes is a result of sex but in itself it is not sex. only the mixing of genes consist in the marriage or indissoluble union of two entity into one new life.
In a nutshell that is what marriage is, full stop. You can dress it up with a ring on the finger, or on the nose, a crown, a veil, a white dress, a cake, do I need to say more, those things do not make marriage a marriage, they are only a prelude of joy an expectation to what hope to happen; and that is the mixing of the two genes.


The family is the center of society, its weakest members the woman and the new borne have to be protected, there is why the law evolved for that purpose.



The rest of your argument is not very smart it is waoooooy of the argument on hand.
So can you do any better to define indissoluble marriage if you take out the mixing of the genes.

try to understand, We call it marriage but there is more to marriage then meets the eye religion does not make a marriage, the law does not make a marriage, a big wedding does not make a marriage, love does not make a marriage, even gender does not make a marriage; because all those things a temporal and can be dissolved, only the mixing of the two genes can marry and form a new indissoluble life, or an indissoluble marriage which will truly last a life time.

No, you're the one who doesn't get it. I'll make it clearer: YOU'RE WRONG.

 

[Draka]

you just do not get it do you; you can have a lot of sex and never mix the genes the mixing of genes is a result of sex but in itself it is not sex. only the mixing of genes consist in the marriage or indissoluble union of two entity into one new life.
In a nutshell that is what marriage is, full stop. You can dress it up with a ring on the finger, or on the nose, a crown, a veil, a white dress, a cake, do I need to say more, those things do not make marriage a marriage, they are only a prelude of joy an expectation to what hope to happen; and that is the mixing of the two genes.


The family is the center of society, its weakest members the woman and the new borne have to be protected, there is why the law evolved for that purpose.



The rest of your argument is not very smart it is waoooooy of the argument on hand.
So can you do any better to define indissoluble marriage if you take out the mixing of the genes.

try to understand, We call it marriage but there is more to marriage then meets the eye religion does not make a marriage, the law does not make a marriage, a big wedding does not make a marriage, love does not make a marriage, even gender does not make a marriage; because all those things a temporal and can be dissolved, only the mixing of the two genes can marry and form a new indissoluble life, or an indissoluble marriage which will truly last a life time.

Wow, you know what? I truly pity any poor deluded woman who ever has the misfortune to marry you. You so clearly do not have any clue what love is or commitment. To you, women are obviously meant to be baby factories and it matters not if you care about them at all for you have not ever mentioned that love is even a component in marriage. And all that "protection of the woman and the newborn" crapola is simply that, crapola. Do you have any idea how many single mothers there are out there raising their children by themselves, holding down jobs, and "protecting" themselves and their children quite well?

Marriage is not about reproduction or "protection" or any other BS that you seem to be pitching in here with a shovel. Marriage is about the coming together of two individuals (or more in the case of poly) to share their lives together. Children are not necessary for any of that to happen or to make it real.

My aunt was married to my uncle for over two decades until cancer took him. He couldn't have children...period. They spent their entire marriage together with no children. They loved each other, took care of each other, went through ups and downs together, helped each other's families, and were side by side until death took one from the other. Your insistance that marriage is about reproduction is not only absurd, but vile in that it says that my aunt and uncle weren't ever married because they did not produce children. Your stance is not just nonsensical, but cruel, vile, disgusting, and flat out wrong on so many levels and by so many definitions. Who are you to determine who can love and commit to each other and say whether their love and commitment is "real" all based on whether children are produced? Your view is grotesque and not only bunk, but absolutely not worth anyone to ever consider. So why don't you just stop peddling your filth here?

 

[free spirit]

Wow, you know what? I truly pity any poor deluded woman who ever has the misfortune to marry you. You so clearly do not have any clue what love is or commitment. To you, women are obviously meant to be baby factories and it matters not if you care about them at all for you have not ever mentioned that love is even a component in marriage. And all that "protection of the woman and the newborn" crapola is simply that, crapola. Do you have any idea how many single mothers there are out there raising their children by themselves, holding down jobs, and "protecting" themselves and their children quite well?

Marriage is not about reproduction or "protection" or any other BS that you seem to be pitching in here with a shovel. Marriage is about the coming together of two individuals (or more in the case of poly) to share their lives together. Children are not necessary for any of that to happen or to make it real.

My aunt was married to my uncle for over two decades until cancer took him. He couldn't have children...period. They spent their entire marriage together with no children. They loved each other, took care of each other, went through ups and downs together, helped each other's families, and were side by side until death took one from the other. Your insistance that marriage is about reproduction is not only absurd, but vile in that it says that my aunt and uncle weren't ever married because they did not produce children. Your stance is not just nonsensical, but cruel, vile, disgusting, and flat out wrong on so many levels and by so many definitions. Who are you to determine who can love and commit to each other and say whether their love and commitment is "real" all based on whether children are produced? Your view is grotesque and not only bunk, but absolutely not worth anyone to ever consider. So why don't you just stop peddling your filth here?

The one who is peddling filth is you, but you cannot help yourself, it is a condition, I am defining the roots and the core meaning of the word indissoluble marriage. But you all like to be in la la land, as I said in the beginning there is no hope for you to understand the unadulterated concept of the meaning of marriage. People can marry people and they can be close, very close, but the true marriage where the two genes became one is only evident in the creation of a new life. That does not mean you uncle weren't married as far as it humanly possible, they simply did not achieved the marriage of their genes thats all.
Where is the filth in that, I even did not make distinction of people gender to be politically correct to the likes of you. So why don't you just stop peddling your filth in this honorable forum. Take it from me, a friend, you are in desperate need of help please get some.

 

[Kerr]

The one who is peddling filth is you, but you cannot help yourself, it is a condition, I am defining the roots and the core meaning of the word indissoluble marriage. But you all like to be in la la land, as I said in the beginning there is no hope for you to understand the unadulterated concept of the meaning of marriage. People can marry people and they can be close, very close, but the true marriage where the two genes became one is only evident in the creation of a new life. That does not mean you uncle weren't married as far as it humanly possible, they simply did not achieved the marriage of their genes thats all.
Where is the filth in that, I even did not make distinction of people gender to be politically correct to the likes of you. So why don't you just stop peddling your filth in this honorable forum. Take it from me, a friend, you are in desperate need of help please get some.

Actually there is a quite huge issue with this. Are you saying that this was why marriage came to be? That this was its original purpose? Because they didn´t even know what a gene was back then.

 

[Draka]

The one who is peddling filth is you, but you cannot help yourself, it is a condition, I am defining the roots and the core meaning of the word indissoluble marriage. But you all like to be in la la land, as I said in the beginning there is no hope for you to understand the unadulterated concept of the meaning of marriage. People can marry people and they can be close, very close, but the true marriage where the two genes became one is only evident in the creation of a new life. That does not mean you uncle weren't married as far as it humanly possible, they simply did not achieved the marriage of their genes thats all.
Where is the filth in that, I even did not make distinction of people gender to be politically correct to the likes of you. So why don't you just stop peddling your filth in this honorable forum. Take it from me, a friend, you are in desperate need of help please get some.

Excuse me, but exactly what "condition" are you saying I have? One of compassion? Condition of love and understanding? The condition of having the intelligence and knowledge about me that I am able to discern the difference between marriage and reproduction? Again, your stance is vile and it seems the only thing you have to defend said disgusting and illogical stance is to insult others' intelligence by saying it is "over their heads" or they have some "condition". You tell me I am the one peddling filth on the forum, but my posts are not the ones filled with misinformation and vile. You then proceed to tell me that you are a friend, but then go on to tell me I am in desperate need of "help" simply because I don't trip over myself to tell you you are right when you are wrong. I'm sorry, I don't believe in lying so I won't do so just to appease your sense of "right and wrong" when your "right" is so very very wrong.

 

[ragordon168]

The one who is peddling filth is you, but you cannot help yourself, it is a condition, I am defining the roots and the core meaning of the word indissoluble marriage. But you all like to be in la la land, as I said in the beginning there is no hope for you to understand the unadulterated concept of the meaning of marriage. People can marry people and they can be close, very close, but the true marriage where the two genes became one is only evident in the creation of a new life. That does not mean you uncle weren't married as far as it humanly possible, they simply did not achieved the marriage of their genes thats all.
Where is the filth in that, I even did not make distinction of people gender to be politically correct to the likes of you. So why don't you just stop peddling your filth in this honorable forum. Take it from me, a friend, you are in desperate need of help please get some.

right im sick of this, you arent shoveling BS anymore your moving it by dump-truck.

define clearly in less than 5 lines what marriage is. and dont use that 'genes' thing because you obviously dont have a clue what a gene is. get a thesaurus and find another word to say what you mean.

i.e
marriage = love between 2 or more people who decide to make a commitment to love each other until death (or divorce). children or sexual orientation is not a requirment.

there three lines and a workable defination. Draka if you can add to that fire away

 

[free spirit]

right im sick of this, you arent shoveling BS anymore your moving it by dump-truck.

Well at list you know how to express yourself.

define clearly in less than 5 lines what marriage is. and dont use that 'genes' thing because you obviously dont have a clue what a gene is. get a thesaurus and find another word to say what you mean.

You have to know that the world has lost the definition of what marriage is, the very existence of this thread is a clear evidence of that. so marriage today can be a myriad of things to different people, usually they define marriage with what is important to them, and that is fine with me.
I am trying to explain with little success the unadulterated primordial and real definition of marriage.

So marriage is to become one with your spouse in spirit and body, that entails mixing of the persona; that at list should be what they should hope for.
But that expectation is rarely achieved between two individuals, however their hope to became one is not lost if they create a new life, for the new life has something of both partners.

in a nutshell marriage is two fold;
1) marriage is ideally for two adults to became one.
2) rarely acknowledged is the indissoluble marriage of the two individual genes becoming one new life

That is the best I can do for you

 

[McBell]

in a nutshell marriage is two fold;
1) marriage is ideally for two adults to became one.
2) rarely acknowledged is the indissoluble marriage of the two individual genes becoming one new life

That is the best I can do for you

Interesting how you would try to change the definition of marriage and then flat out lie with claims of your new definition being some old forgotten definition.

So much for "Thou Shalt Not Lie"